BCS standings

[Rider]

Originally Posted by tommymac

Problem is when you get a few teams that may be deserving of a shot. Seem slik eevery year theres one or 2 teams that kinda get screwed.

Tom

Oh I know the system is flawed and I am for a playoff. I just think it's better than the old system.

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by Rider

Oh I know the system is flawed and I am for a playoff. I just think it's better than the old system.

its a step in the right direction, I just dont see a playoff happening with all the money all the schools get for the stupid bowl games. I think it woul dhurt the smaller programs since they would kinda hav eot do away with the (insert sponsor name here ) Bowls that the smaller schools usualy go to.

Tom

[Rider]

Originally Posted by tommymac

its a step in the right direction, I just dont see a playoff happening with all the money all the schools get for the stupid bowl games. I think it woul dhurt the smaller programs since they would kinda hav eot do away with the (insert sponsor name here ) Bowls that the smaller schools usualy go to.

Tom

My solution would be to keep all the current bowls minus the BCS championship bowl. Have an 8 team playoff after Jan 1. So you go 3 weeks into January. No big deal.

The 8 teams would be the best team from each of the 6 BCS conferences and 2 at large teams.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Rider

I hate the BCS but it's better than awarding the NC to a team that may not be the best. I know the current setup is not a guarantee either but at least you get the #1 and #2 playing each other. You don't get shared titles anymore like UW and UM had in 1991.

LSU/USC managed to share the AP and BCS titles in 2003.

We need a real NCAA champion of college football. There has never been a recognized NCAA champion of college football. That's just messed up. Pretty much every other major NCAA sport has this...


What I would like to see is the six BCS conferences have conference championship games. If you want in, you have to have a conference title game. The winner from these title games plays in a 8 team playoff. With 2 at large/open spots for crappy conferences or 2 other good teams that didn't win their conference.

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by Rider

My solution would be to keep all the current bowls minus the BCS championship bowl. Have an 8 team playoff after Jan 1. So you go 3 weeks into January. No big deal.

The 8 teams would be the best team from each of the 6 BCS conferences and 2 at large teams.

An 8 teaqm playoff is the wa yto go but should be the best 8 teams not necessarily conference champs. the loser of this years sec title game should still be considered one of the 8 best teams in the country. No matter what there will be some sort of controversey.

[Trip]

Originally Posted by Rider

My solution would be to keep all the current bowls minus the BCS championship bowl. Have an 8 team playoff after Jan 1. So you go 3 weeks into January. No big deal.

The 8 teams would be the best team from each of the 6 BCS conferences and 2 at large teams.

Hey we think alike, lolz

[Trip]

Originally Posted by tommymac

An 8 teaqm playoff is the wa yto go but should be the best 8 teams not necessarily conference champs. the loser of this years sec title game should still be considered one of the 8 best teams in the country. No matter what there will be some sort of controversey.

In my solution, every conference is forced to have a conference champ game. That is part of the playoffs. If you can't win in the playoffs, tough shit. The best team doesn't always win the championship, that's why you play the game.

[tommymac]

Originally Posted by Trip

In my solution, every conference is forced to have a conference champ game. That is part of the playoffs. If you can't win in the playoffs, tough shit. The best team doesn't always win the championship, that's why you play the game.

I just dont like every conference getting an automatic representation, some years a conference could be real shitty then you could have something like the sec or big 12 with 3 or 4 potential good teams.

the problem with football compared to other sprts is its a one game winner take all set up so anything can happen. in other sprts a 5 or 7 game series the better team is going to usualy win out.

Tom

[Trip]

Originally Posted by tommymac

I just dont like every conference getting an automatic representation, some years a conference could be real shitty then you could have something like the sec or big 12 with 3 or 4 potential good teams.

the problem with football compared to other sprts is its a one game winner take all set up so anything can happen. in other sprts a 5 or 7 game series the better team is going to usualy win out.

Tom

That's why you have open/at large bids. Polls don't work, they never have and never will. This erases the need for polls completely except for the two at large spots.

Look at the playoffs in every other pro sport. Not every division deserves a spot, but it reduces the amount of games needed to play drastically. You can't have a 64 team playoff in football like you can in NCAA basketball (which doesn't have a 5/7 game series) and still have a decent season. NFL doesn't have series play. It has to be reduced, this is the way to reduce it. Yes, not all the best teams are going to win it, but cinderella is more fun.

[Rider]

Originally Posted by Trip

In my solution, every conference is forced to have a conference champ game. That is part of the playoffs. If you can't win in the playoffs, tough shit. The best team doesn't always win the championship, that's why you play the game.

The biggest hurdle would be the Big 10 getting one more team to join the conference so that there are 12 teams thus getting a conference title game. There have been rumors of a 12th team joining the conference. Currently the names thrown around are Pitt and Cincinnati. Hell even Syracuse would be a good pick up.